Embattled employment advocate Allan Halse has been dealt another blow, with a court saying this week that he failed to look after vulnerable workers he represented in an employment dispute.
On Monday, the High Court at Hamilton ordered his company CultureSafe NZ be placed into liquidation.
Halse was in courtthe next day fighting bankruptcy proceedings brought by an employer over penalties and costs awarded against Halse and his company by the Employment Relations Authority [ERA].
An auto-reply on an email said CultureSafe NZ was no longer trading but Halse was continuing as a sole trader, until a new business was established.
It followed several years of controversial headlines related to Halse's representation of alleged victims of workplace bullying.
The Employment Court has this week turned down his firm's application to review an earlier decision by the ERA.
CultureSafe NZ Limited, of which Halse was sole director, sought a judicial review of the ERA's decision that CultureSafe had not established authority to act for grievants in an employment dispute.
The focus of the latest dispute was around workers from Northland firm Manuka Health he acted for during 2019 and 2020.
CultureSafe acted for employees, including grievants who in 2019 had resigned, and who a few months later lodged claims against Manuka Health with the ERA.
The health company's lawyer raised concerns that forms signed by the grievants giving CultureSafe authority to act, gave it the power to make decisions on their behalf.
After detailed consideration, the ERA found the forms did not meet legal requirements, and therefore CultureSafe had not established its authority to represent the grievants.
A lack of anything further from them prompted the ERA to order CultureSafe to either file appropriate forms giving it authority to act, or provide the grievants' contact details so it could inquire as to their intentions.
The Employment Court said this week that advocate firm CultureSafe NZ had failed to look after vulnerable workers. Photo / 123RF
This was to have happened within 10 days, but by April 6 last year, when the required information was not filed, the authority issued a fourth Minute, administratively closing the file until the grievants advised if they were ready to proceed.
The Employment Court said in a decision this week, that as far as the ERA was concerned, that decision still stood.
The court hearing was given newer authority-to-act forms, signed by the grievants in January 2021, but there was nothing to indicate that these forms had been provided to the ERA.
The court accepted there was a limit to the extent to which it could appropriately address professional standards issues which arose in respect of the conduct of some advocates.
This extended to how that impacted on often vulnerable litigants, the opposing party, and more generally, the efficient and effective administration of justice.
Judge Joanna Holden found that in this instance CultureSafe NZ had not looked after the grievants.
"The authority records that they are visa-dependent workers for whom English is a second language and that one of them is currently offshore.
"As the Authority notes, their personal circumstances may put them in a category of employees who are inherently vulnerable.
"Their interests ought to have been paramount in CultureSafe's engagement with Manuka Health and with the authority.
"They were entitled to expect that CultureSafe would progress their claims expeditiously.
"Unfortunately, CultureSafe has failed to do so, leaving the grievants in limbo," Judge Holden said.
She said it was unsatisfactory that their interests, and those of Manuka Health and its current and former employees who would be witnesses in these proceedings, had been subsumed in the present argument.
Manuka Health accepted that CultureSafe had standing, and its advocate in the Employment Court acknowledged that CultureSafe itself was given a significant opportunity to comment.
The court said that for this reason, it was hard to see how the authority could be criticised.
"In short then, there is no basis for a claim by CultureSafe for alleged failure by the Authority to afford it natural justice."
Judge Holden added it was not necessary in this case for the court to consider whether it had jurisdiction to hear a claim based on a breach of natural justice.
The court also said the argument that the order was reviewable for being unreasonable also failed on the facts.
"The authority expressly asked CultureSafe for the contact details of the grievants so the authority could contact them to inquire as to their intentions.
"The principal issue in the case is a narrow one: whether the authority had jurisdiction to consider the basis on which CultureSafe was engaged."
The court said the application for judicial review failed, but if the grievants wanted to pursue their claims, updated authority-to-act forms should be filed with the Employment Relations Authority, or they could contact the Authority.
Manuka Health was entitled to costs.
Allan Halse told Open Justice he now planned to go back to the clients and their representative embassies in New Zealand to let them know they were "not allowed to have the representation of their choice".
He added his clients had a right to be heard, and felt it was the ERA and court denying this.
"I'll do whatever it takes to have the case heard," he said.
A world-first Kiwi-developed food technology that upcycles horticultural waste into high-value products is set to reduce NZ’s dependence on imported food ingredients.
